ArticleChinese neurosurgical journal2025
Chemoradiation treatment with or without concurrent tumor-treating fields (TTFields) therapy in newly diagnosed glioblastoma (GBM) patients in China.
Article in Chinese neurosurgical journal, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Tumor treating fields combined with concurrent chemoradiotherapy for glioblastoma: A multi-institutional analysis.iScience · 2026Article
- Tumor Electric Field Therapy Inhibits Epithelial-Mesenchymal Transition, Invasion, and Migration of Glioblastoma by Targeting the c-FOS/CXCL14 Axis.CNS neuroscience & therapeutics · 2026Article
- Glioblastoma Multiforme: Current Developments in Molecular Pathways, Magnetic Field-Based Interventions, and Personalized Therapy.Journal of clinical practice and research · 2026Review
- Tumor Electric Field Therapy Inhibits TGF-β/C1R Signaling Axis-Driven Epithelial-Mesenchymal Transition in Glioblastoma.CNS neuroscience & therapeutics · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTumor-treating fields (TTFields) therapy and radiotherapy may have synergistic anti-glioma effect based on preclinical studies. The combination of chemoradiation therapy (CRT) with TTFields therapy has noticeably attracted clinicians' attention. This study aimed to provide insights into the clinical outcomes of patients with newly diagnosed glioblastoma who received either concurrent CRT and TTFields therapy or adjuvant TTFields therapy following CRT. The findings were based on a cohort of patients who were treated at Huashan Hospital (Shanghai, China).
methodsThis retrospective study analyzed ndGBM patients' clinical outcomes who were treated at Huashan Hospital and received TTFields therapy. Patients were categorized into two groups: one group received adjuvant TTFields therapy after completing CRT (referred to as the A-TTF group), while the other received TTFields therapy concurrently with CRT and continued TTFields after treatment (referred to as the CA-TTF group). The study evaluated treatment efficacy and toxicities, comparing outcomes between the two groups. Overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were analyzed using the Kaplan-Meier method. To mitigate confounding factors, efficacy was assessed using the Cox proportional hazards regression model, propensity score matching, and inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) based on the propensity score.
resultsA total of 72 patients with ndGBM were included in the study. Among them, 41 patients received concurrent and adjuvant TTFields therapy in combination with CRT (CA-TTF group), and 31 patients received adjuvant TTFields therapy with temozolomide (A-TTF group). The median follow-up time was 18.0 months. No significant differences were observed in median PFS (14.2 vs. 15.0 months, P = 0.92) or OS (20.8 vs. 20.0 months, P = 0.92) between the CA-TTF and A-TTF groups. Skin toxicity was common, while manageable, with no significant difference between the two groups. Following IPTW adjustment, the hazard ratios for PFS and OS indicated a potential advantage for the CA-TTF group, although this difference was not statistically significant.
conclusionConcurrent CRT and TTFields therapy emerged safe for newly diagnosed GBM patients. Although no significant survival differences were found between the CA-TTF and A-TTF groups, the potential benefit of concurrent TTFields warrants further investigation through large-scale clinical trials.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.